NZ gamers not just anti-social teenage boys: study

Print

Mon, 16 Aug 2010 7:00p.m.

The study showed that the average person who plays games is 33, and 44 percent of gamers are female (Reuters)

The study showed that the average person who plays games is 33, and 44 percent of gamers are female (Reuters)

By David Farrier

The gaming industry has seen a huge growth in the last 10 years.

That's everything from playing strategy games on your computer through to waving your arms around with a Nintendo Wii, or maybe you just like shooting things on your Xbox or PlayStation.

Or, if you're in the minority, maybe you do none of these things.

Regardless, there's never been a particularly comprehensive study into who's playing games in New Zealand and how they're playing them.

Until now.

The Interactive New Zealand 2010 (INZ10) report conducted on behalf of the Interactive Games & Entertainment Association (iGEA) by Bond University has conducted the most comprehensive study of its kind to be undertaken in New Zealand.

3386 people were surveyed – 1958 were gamers and 1428 identified themselves as non-gamers.

Once upon a time, strategy games focused on getting a frog from one side of a river to another – now they focus on interplanetary relations.

Action games were based on shooting pixelated Nazis – now we're in the middle realistic war zones.

And as the games have changed, so has their reach and popularity.

“88.5 percent of homes in New Zealand have a device for playing video games,” says Dr Jeffrey Brand, of Bond University.

“What I was very surprised to discover was 100 percent of houses with children under 18 had a device for playing computer games. That’s the first time anywhere I’ve observed that kind of finding. It shows a household with children is a gaming household.

“I think most people [think] the average gamer [is] male, is a teenager, is antisocial, and for lack of better description, [is] backwards! In fact the reality is the average gamer is an adult.

“Seventy eight percent of New Zealanders who play are over 18 and I think that shatters illusions in conversations about games.”

Indeed, the original geek who grew up with games has now matured and chances are, has a family.

After all, there have been seven generations of consoles. The first generation in the 1970s looked a bit like this:

First generation gaming console

Generation seven are the Xbox 360s, the PlayStation 3s and the Nintendo Wiis.

 “What’s happened is first generation of gamers are now parents, many of them parents of teens, and they have a higher literacy of games and are more open to using them in the home,” says Mr Brand.

The survey reveals so much, it's hard to know where to start, but there are quite a few interesting numbers:

  • The average person who plays games is 33
  • 44 percent of gamers are female, 56 percent are male
  • The average gamer has been playing for 12 years
  • Non-gamers are, on average, 40-years-old
  • 82 percent of parents are present when their children buy a game

And while it's often said the games industry makes more money than movies and music - we now have proof.

In New Zealand in 2009:

  • Cinema box office takings totalled $169,970,000
  • CD sales and digital downloads totalled $51,708,700
  • Sales of video games and consoles totalled $170,149,000

Games win.

Click here to see the full report.

Of course saying the average gamer is 33 doesn't mean they're all 33. The survey revealed children as young as three are partaking in video games.

It’s a reminder to us that gamers are everywhere – they're not freakish, or geeky. In 2010, they're just bog-standard normal.

“The oldest gamer in this study was 85. So I think it’s safe to say the average gamer is like the average citizen,” says Mr Brand.

The study proves beyond doubt that Michael Laws was wrong when he famously quoted: "Gamers are a very unusual group of people. If mass murder was ever to be committed in this country, it would be committed by a gamer."

Game over.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

16 Sep 2010 08:31a.m.

F wrote:

James, as a girl gamer I am sickened by your outrageous sexism towards girls playing 'games'. I assure you, I know many many girls-- some who wouldn't classify themselves as gamers at all-- who play video games a lot more than once a day, an hour at a time. Many of them just play WoW, but that's still a game, and an addictive one at that! Just because young men are the loud purported stereotype for gaming at long hours does not mean it's true. Like this study proves.

08 Sep 2010 06:39p.m.

James wrote:

Their classification of a gamer is too general, it's quite likely that 90% of those girls who game probably play their wii once a month. If you compare gaming hours men would be about 90%+.

21 Aug 2010 12:50p.m.

misinformed fools wrote:

@pete - you comments make you out to seem like an absolute moron. Please don't comment on something you know absolutel;y zero about. Maybe you are qualified to make comments about certain old testament bible verses, or maybe knitting or something, but you've used a racist and outdated term here (Eskimos - do you also call Native Americans "Indians"? Thought so.) and you know NOTHING about videogaming, just what you read from Rush Limbaugh or the pope in 1989 maybe. Which is nothing. At all. You idiot.

17 Aug 2010 04:55p.m.

Haha wrote:

Any parents with computers and kids who say their kids don't play games on the computers are fooling themselves. The minute you leave the house, they're on there playing games, trust me.

17 Aug 2010 04:51p.m.

andy wrote:

@pete going you are so dumb. your probably a middle aged fat woman. games are good. how can you compare it to p? you idiot. people like you should not exist. i condenm you.

17 Aug 2010 04:44p.m.

Fiona Jackson wrote:

"a household with children is a gaming household." What?? I have two children, and two computers (MAC), neither of which are used for gaming, or even games. We don't have an xbox, Wii or anything else. I like computer games, I played them when I was younger, but not any more, so unless you count board games... we are certainly not a family of 'gamers'. Poor research!

17 Aug 2010 03:25p.m.

M3N78L wrote:

@ Pete Going.. Your comments are ludicrous. Do you actually know anything about gaming, or are you quoting word and verse from your bible? I'm 41 and have been a serious gamer for many, many years. I'm definitely not anti-social and can co-operate and share (yes,including my opinion) with almost anyone. Computer gaming generally requires a high level of interaction with other people, ie: setting up games (lan or wan) and co-operating with other players for strategic advantage, also a fair amount of technical competence is required from all players. That's right! Playing games has increased my computer savvy. Perhaps it is decadent, but no more so than any of our "National Sports" rugby, netball, yacht racing, horse racing, binge drinking et al (all of which leave me quite cold). Also it is far cheaper for the "average" person to have a go at. Personally, I see people with closed minds as weak, and yours sir, is more closed than Georgie Pie. To summarise, if you see manipulating pixels on a screen as a "pointless battle for world dominance" then perhaps you would be better off in the company of the Inuit. Yes Inuit. Eskimos are racist lollies.

17 Aug 2010 02:26p.m.

Mumma B wrote:

Pete... I agree. "It shows a household with children is a gaming household." Sorry WRONG just because we have a computer, the means with which to play games doesn't mean we do. What sort of logic is he using, sounds like a rather bias one.

17 Aug 2010 11:54a.m.

Pete Going wrote:

Interesting that this study (funded by the game industry, very impartial) construes the fact that because lots of people are playing games this means they must be OK. Would the same argument be used for alcohol or P? No, it would be seen as a total disaster.

I don't know if this is a crisis but I think it is decadent. More people are probably being brainwashed/molded into seeing the world as a pointless battle for dominance,when they could be working together to do something useful.

Competition for dominance may have it's place in our society but the person incapable of cooperating & sharing is disadvantaged in civilised society, I see these sorts of people as weak.


I think the Eskimos had the right idea, they executed missionaries who tried to introduce competitive games into their society. I'm not condoning execution of course but I admire their stand.